SURVEY RESULTS: PAIN POINTS JOURNALISM/SCIENCE COLLABORATIONS

We surveyed science journalists to assess their attitudes toward working with scientists and the challenges they face in such collaborations, here are the results:

In an era where journalism and science increasingly intertwine, collaboration between journalists and scientists is becoming more and more important. Effective partnerships can help bridge the gap between scientific knowledge and public understanding, and inform policy decisions. To explore this dynamic, we conducted a survey to assess science journalists’ attitudes toward working with scientists and the challenges they face in such collaborations. The survey was shared among various science journalism networks, and asked questions like, “How comfortable do you feel working with scientists?” and “What resources would help you work more effectively with them?” Our aim was to identify opportunities to enhance collaboration between science journalists and scientists. 

The survey results paint an optimistic picture of these interdisciplinary efforts. Many journalists and scientists are actively engaged in collaborative work, indicating a solid foundation for these partnerships. The majority of respondents report collaborating with scientists either "sometimes" or "often," and generally, they feel "somewhat comfortable" to "extremely comfortable" in these interactions. This comfort level suggests a functional rapport between the two fields, though it is not without its nuances.

Attitudes towards these collaborations are notably positive. Respondents frequently describe their experiences as ranging from "somewhat positive" to "extremely positive," reflecting a broad recognition of the benefits of working together. However, this optimism is tempered by the acknowledgment that significant challenges remain.

One critical finding from the survey is the consensus on the importance of journalists possessing a deep understanding of scientific topics. Nearly all respondents view this as "very important" or "extremely important." This highlights the crucial need for journalists to thoroughly engage with scientific content to be able to effectively communicate complex scientific ideas to the public. Without this depth of understanding, there is a risk of misrepresentation or superficial reporting.

However, the survey also highlights persistent pain points that complicate these collaborations. Journalists often grapple with scientific jargon, which can obfuscate rather than clarify the research. Communication barriers, whether stemming from differences in professional language or institutional protocols, also pose significant challenges. Additionally, access issues—ranging from difficulties in reaching scientists to scheduling conflicts—frequently impede the smooth flow of information.

In terms of support and resources, the survey reveals a mixed picture. While some organizations provide robust support for science-related stories, others fall short. Respondents express a clear need for improved resources, including better access to a network of scientists, training on scientific topics and jargon, translation services to make complex concepts more digestible, and collaborative tools to streamline interactions.

A striking aspect of the survey is the interest in nontraditional roles that involve closer collaboration with scientists. Many science journalists  are enthusiastic about opportunities in science communication, outreach, and educational program development. Journalists see their unique skills—storytelling, public communication, critical thinking, investigative prowess, and audience engagement—as valuable contributions to these collaborative efforts.

Despite the challenges, there are notable positive experiences reported. Journalists appreciate working with scientists who are passionate and open to collaboration, especially those skilled at making technical concepts accessible. Hands-on experiences, such as participating in fieldwork with scientists, and additional materials provided by scientists to enhance storytelling, are particularly valued.

To address the challenges and enhance future collaborations, several recommendations emerge from the survey. Developing comprehensive databases to facilitate the identification of scientific experts could streamline the collaboration process. Clearer boundaries should be established to balance journalistic integrity with scientific freedom. Improved access to scientific papers and other resources, coupled with promoting direct and transparent dialogue between journalists and scientists, is essential. Increased funding for science journalism projects could also provide the necessary support to further these partnerships.

In summation, the survey presents a largely positive view of journalist-scientist collaborations, tempered by several identifiable challenges. By addressing issues related to communication and access through targeted training and improved resources, we can enhance the quality and impact of these interdisciplinary partnerships. Such improvements are crucial for bridging the gap between complex scientific knowledge and public understanding, ultimately fostering a more informed and engaged audience.

Please find the survey results below: 

Findings: 

1. Collaboration frequency and comfort level

The survey results reveal a generally positive engagement: most journalists report collaborating with scientists "sometimes" or "often." Comfort levels in these interactions are also favorable, with the majority of respondents feeling "somewhat comfortable" to "extremely comfortable" working alongside scientists. This indicates a solid foundation for interdisciplinary work, though nuances in these relationships warrant closer examination.

2. Attitudes toward collaboration

Respondents predominantly express positive attitudes towards collaborating with scientists. Many describe their experiences as "somewhat positive" to "extremely positive," suggesting a recognition of the benefits inherent in these partnerships. This optimism underscores the potential for enhanced collaboration, despite the challenges that may arise.

3. Importance of scientific understanding

A critical finding is the consensus on the importance of journalists having a deep understanding of scientific topics. Nearly all respondents regard this as "very important" or "extremely important." This highlights the necessity for journalists to engage thoroughly with scientific content to accurately convey complex ideas to the public.

4. Major challengers

The most frequently cited challenges when working with scientists included:

• Understanding scientific jargon

• Communication barriers

• Access to scientists

• Scheduling conflicts

5. Support and resources

• Respondents report varied levels of organizational support for science-related stories, indicating a need for improved resources. Desired enhancements include:

  • Access to a network of scientists

  • Training on scientific topics

  • Translation services for scientific jargon

  • Collaborative tools and platforms

6. Interest in nontraditional roles

• Many respondents expressed interest in nontraditional roles involving close collaboration with scientists, such as science communication, outreach, and educational program development.

7. Unique skills journalists bring to collaborations

A notable interest in nontraditional roles involving closer collaboration with scientists—such as in science communication, outreach, and educational programs—is evident. Journalists highlight their contributions to these collaborations as:

• Storytelling

• Public communication

• Critical thinking

• Investigative skills

• Audience engagement

8. Challenges

• Difficulty in understanding research papers and finding experts in niche areas

• Scientists' skepticism or fear of the press

• Obstruction by public affairs or communication departments

• Editors' preferences conflicting with scientific nuance and precise wording

• Scientists assuming journalists are ignorant

• Pressure for stories to be "newsworthy" in a narrowly defined way

9. Positive experiences

• Scientists who are passionate, open to collaboration, and skilled at explaining technical ideas to non-technical audiences

• Opportunities for hands-on experiences (e.g., tagging birds with an ornithologist)

• Scientists providing additional materials (audio recordings, pictures, videos) to enhance storytelling

10.  Suggestions for future collaborations 

Based on the survey findings, several recommendations emerge to strengthen journalist-scientist partnerships:

1. Expert databases: Develop comprehensive databases to streamline the identification of scientific experts.

2. Clear boundaries: Define boundaries in collaborations to balance journalistic integrity with scientific freedom.

3. Improved access: Enhance access to scientific papers and other relevant resources.

4. Open communication: Promote direct and transparent dialogue, reducing barriers imposed by institutional communication departments.

5. Increased funding: Provide more funding opportunities for science journalism projects.